MYRTACEAE 



401 



be specifically distinct from the one described as Metrosideros 

 vera par vi folia, although a more extended exploration of the 

 Moluccas may show that two distinct species are involved. 



EUCALYPTUS L'Heritier 



EUCALYPTUS DEGLUPTA Blume Mus. Bot. 1 (1849) 83. 

 Populus deglubata Reinw. ex Blume 1. c. in syn. 

 Eucalyptus versicolor Blume Mus. Bot. 1 (1849) 84 (type!). 

 Eucalyptus multiflora Rich ex A. Gray Bot. Wilkes U. S. Explor. 



Exped. (1854) 554. 

 Eucalyptus naudiniana F. Muell. in Austral. Journ. Pharm. (1886) 



239, Bot. Centralbl. 28 (1886) 179. 

 Eugenia binacag Elm. Lean. Philip. Bot. 7 (1914) 2351. 

 Eucalyptus binacag Elm. 1. c. 8 (1915) 2776. 

 Arbor versicolor Rumph. Herb. Amb. 3: 122, t. 80. 



Rumphius's material, on which his figure and description of 

 Arbor versicolor were based, was from Ceram, not from Am- 

 boina. The description and the figure, as far as they go, are 

 unmistakably a Eucalyptus. I feel quite confident that Eugenia 

 deglupta Blume, from Celebes ; E. versicolor Blume, from Ceram ; 

 E. multiflora Rich and E. binacag Elm., of Mindanao; and E. 

 naudiniana F. MuelL, of the Bismarck Archipelago, are all refer- 

 able to a single species, which is now definitely known from a 

 half-dozen localities in Mindanao, from New Guinea, and from 

 the Bismarck Archipelago, and with the inclusion of Blume's 

 species, from Celebes and Ceram. There is not a character 

 given by Blume for either Eucalyptus versicolor or E. deglupta 

 by which the two can be definitely distinguished from each 

 other or from Eucalyptus naudiniana F.-Muell. Eucalyptus 

 moluccana Roxb., as described, must represent a different species, 

 at least entirely different from Eucalyptus naudiniana F.-Muell. 

 and the Philippine synonyms cited here. Eucalyptus versicolor 

 Blume is based wholly on Rumphius's description of Arbor versi- 

 color, and it is to be noted that Blume, by error, cites t. 53 instead 

 of t. 80 as representing the species. The latter figure is Eugenia 

 subglauca Koord. & Valeton, as I have here determined it (see 

 p. 395). 



Eucalyptus sarassa Blume, Mus. Bot. 1 (1849) 84, unaccom- 

 panied by any word of description, was based on Kaju sarassa 

 Rumph., incidentally mentioned by Rumphius, Herb. Amb. 3: 

 122, following the description of Arbor versicolor. It is inde- 

 terminable from any data now available, and there is little 

 or no evidence that it belongs to Eucalyptus. 



144971 26 



